The eating of meat - The Vegetarian discussion

Sun Wukong

Sun Wukong

Well-Known Member
If my kids hadn't already been confronted with such a subject-which would be natural due to my life-style sooner or later, then I would explain it to them rationally, like in the case of all eaten animal products, may it be pork, chicken, beef, lamb, bison, deer, horse, fish, guinea pig, kudu, springbok, crayfish, calamari, oysters etc. If so many people can eat "cute little piglets" as suckling-BBQ or "cute little chicken" wings, then I don't see why zoo bears should get a special treatment and eating them should be considered "sick".

Most whale sharks were caught on purpose.
And btw: it's not one GWS at Monterey; I think they're now at number three...;)
 
Well I find the idea of eating any meat sick to be honest, so as you can imagine people killing the bears to eat is deffinately considered "sick", to me at least
 
Last edited:
@ashley-h: So what do You think are the carnivores fed in zoos-tofu? Reminds me of Gary Larson's "Tofu antelopes"cartoon...
Sorry, there's nothing "sick" about eating meat. That's an attitude that emanates from privileged western societies where the range of foods is large and plentiful and allows alternative ways of dining. If someone doesn't want to eat meat, that's his/her decision; but artifically alimenting a phony antipathy against a certain array of foods isn't a very wise move.
 
Last edited:
I agree.

Predators should be able to eat the diet they require. If that is meat and a lot of it, so be it. I don't like meat, but I think these animals need to eat something resembling their natural diet.
 
I totally agree Sun, In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with eating any kind of meant, Wether it be Cow, Sheep, Emu, Red Deer (!) Kangaroo or Giant Panda, i dont see any problem with eating an endangered species if it is for survival either, or even to the extent where as they are not over exploiting the resources. There is such a thing as sustainable hunting, native peoples have (or had in most cases) practiced it for 1000's of years
 
I think ashley is a vegetarian - which is entirely reasonable - and not advocating that carnivorous zoo animals become vegetarian as inferred by some.

Humans have evolved as omnivores, however the proportion of meat in the 21st century diet is the highest it has ever been. I eat plenty of meat and know I am a hypocrite but I think vegetarians talk a lot of sense. If we all ate less meat (less food overall really) then it would be better for the climate, the rainforest, our health, and for the unfortunate animals which we eat.

There has been plenty of debate over the treatment of animals in zoos and circuses in these pages - is it not as reasonable to consider the living conditions of the animals we eat - there are far more of them? Do a couple of elephants suffer as much as the 60 million battery chickens raised each year in the UK?
 
Pygathrix said:
If we all ate less meat (less food overall really) then it would be better for the climate, the rainforest, our health, and for the unfortunate animals which we eat.
Click to expand...

I would be a little careful when generalizing like that. The conclusion drawn and advocated by some vegetarians and especially vegans that a decrease of meat production and/or replacement with agricultural crops will result in the positive effects mentioned above, isn't always rooted in reality, especially in regard to the very different terrains worldwide, where agriculture is taking place (i.e. there are areas where the planting of crops is highly limited due to weather/land conditions and the husbandry of productive livestock is the only option) and to subjects like the nutritional upvaluation of plants via animal products (think of grass...). Whether "the rainforest" is destroyed for more cattle feedlots or soy bean plantations for the vegetarian market doesn't change the result, i.e. the destruction of "the" rainforest (or any other, less rainy forest).

You're correct in stating that a decreased consumption of meat, at least in the rich western societies, would be advisble, in regard of certain health issues (think of one of Paracelsus's most popular quotes) as well as in regard of animal welfare, as a financial upvaluation of the animal products would benefit the farm animals in a higher investment for their well-being and less wearing out productive demands-> "slow food"production. In regard to the last, I thus wouldn' called animals involved as "unfortunate".
In terms of suffering: depends on the individual husbandry of the elephants and the chickens respectively-long-term "suffering" vs. short-term "suffering". Nevertheless, I'm against the double moral standards in terms of zoo animals/pets and farm animals-also in the case of zoogoers (not aimed personally at ashley-h, but covering a lot of stupid remarks by self-acclaimed
"animal lovers" I have heard so far...)...
 
Thank you Sun. I will try to reply in a non-condescending way.

Yes I was generalising. Yes what I said is in fact globally true - do you not agree? I did not mention that some land unsuitable for arable production can support livestock. That was your point and it does not undermine mine. Of course I am aware of this as I am not stupid.

Large tracts of the Amazonian rainforest have been replaced by beef ranches in order to pad the already fat behinds of Americans and Europeans - the very "privileged western societies" you refer to. In case you hadn't noticed it is largely Western overconsumption of energy, food, everything, which is the principal root of the threat facing the whole planet.

Naturally I am aware of indigenous people who have eaten meat for millennia, if they all became vegetarian it would not make a great difference, but if the whole of America did, it would. (That's not even considering bush meat btw).
 
I agree with the omnivorous points made above...

Our bodies are suited for a mainly herbivouristic diet supplemented by meat, our adaptability is a big part of the reason we are "successful" as a species...
 
You're welcome, Pygathrix ...
No, I don't agree-both on the global level aspect (at least partly) as well as on the "condescending" aspect.
"Large tracts of the Amazonian rainforest" have been replaced or destroyed not just by beef ranches, but also due to logging and by farms producing crops like soy beans etc.-and that not just for the animal food market, but also for the "fat behinds" of Americans and Europeans (so other western nations don't have large bottoms?-interesting; so the fat Japanese guys I saw on Sumo-TV are probably Europeans or Americans...;)) as well as the ever-growing human population worldwide, in the form of various soy etc. products...
BTW: "In case you hadn't noticed"-whoa, who's condescending whom? Neither did I treat You like an idiot nor did I call You one.
It's not just the western societies that can be addressed as the "prinicipal root of threat"; it's all 6+ billion of us. And due to this, even if the "fat-behinded" Americans and Europeans changed their diet from one day to another, this wouldn't change a lot in terms of "the" rainforest; they or others, like the Chinese, would just use the area for another purpose, may it be soy beans, corn or aquacultures. After all, there are still 6 billion mouths that want to be fed. That's all what my post said-no condescending, no insulting; I'm just not buying the advertisements by the vegans and their kind as there are too many "plot holes" and inconsistencies in their suggestions-that's all.

@NZ Jeremy: "herbivore"? I'd say that the term "omnivore" actually is the best fitting one; we neither have complex and large intestines like many herbivore animals; nor do we have the "equipment" for a carnivorous lifestyle like cats. And if You look at all the things humans eat & drink worldwide-meat,vegetables, roots, fruits, fish, blood, mushrooms, milk & milk products(including "mite" cheese), vegemite, various invertebrates, duck legs, haggis, American hotdogs, kopi luwak, fish eggs, twinkie, Bird's nest soup...then the term "devouring all" is pretty appropriate. :)
 
Last edited:
Thank you Pygathrix, that is all I meant, and I was not "artifically alimenting a phony antipathy against a certain array of foods". No, of course I wouldn't stop carnivores like Lions etc eating meat, but I have a choice not to eat meat, and I choose not to on for ethical reasons.
 
Sun Wukong said:
@NZ Jeremy: "herbivore"? I'd say that the term "omnivore" actually is the best fitting one
Click to expand...

I didn't say we are herbivores, to clarify from what I've read the human body is designed to eat herivoristic items (e.g. fruits, vegetables) with meat "on the side"... I could well be wrong on this I'm not a nutritionist...

Sun Wukong said:
milk & milk products(including "mite" cheese
Click to expand...

I personally have avoided milk products (replaced by soy milk, except in my daily coffee) for about a year now and have felt much better as a result... My personal opinion is milk is great nutrition for baby cows not adult humans...

Sun Wukong said:
And if You look at all the things humans eat & drink worldwide-meat,vegetables, roots, fruits, fish, blood, mushrooms, milk & milk products(including "mite" cheese), vegemite, various invertebrates, duck legs, haggis, American hotdogs, kopi luwak, fish eggs, twinkie, Bird's nest soup...then the term "devouring all" is pretty appropriate. :)
Click to expand...

I can tell you the diet at my station's cafeteria consists of soft drink, chips, pies, saturated fats, copious amounts of coffee and of course cigarettes..! LOL
(except those health freak officers..!)
 
Chris79 said:
I have an omnivorous diet - it's what my teeth have evolved for :D
Click to expand...

Just something another veggie asked a meat eater who was having a go at them (not saying you are btw): If that's so, then why aren't you equipped with teeth like a lion/tiger has to kill it yourself?
Found it amusing :)
 
Ha great :)
 
I can understand where you coming from Ashley...

My gf is a vego and chooses to be so due to the fact she grew up on a farm and did not like some of the sights she saw (not your typical farm kid) but she has never tried to force it on me in anyway, its just her choice...
 
@ashley-h: Could You ask Your "veggie" friend just something: Then why are You "plant eaters" not equipped with a large multipart, complex stomach or a large caecum as well as very broad grinding teeth...?
Sorry, but I hate the artificial seperation brought up by vegetarians; there are neither "sheepish plant-eaters" nor "primitive carnivores"-we're all humans, and if the vegetarians & vegans ask for acceptance of their food choice, then they should also respect other's choice without degrading it.
@NZ Jeremy: I doubt whether the change from milk to soy products is really of great value, but if You think it's better for You, feel free to do so.
 
…QED:)


Sun Wukong said:
"Large tracts of the Amazonian rainforest" have been replaced or destroyed not just by beef ranches, but also due to logging and by farms producing crops like soy beans etc.-and that not just for the animal food market
Click to expand...

Why do you keep using non-sequitur distracters? Do you think it makes your argument stronger? Land is being destroyed for meat production, just because there are other threats does not make this less true.

Sun Wukong said:
but also for the "fat behinds" of Americans and Europeans (so other western nations don't have large bottoms?-interesting; so the fat Japanese guys I saw on Sumo-TV are probably Europeans or Americans..
Click to expand...

Oh dear, these are just examples. For concrete thinkers, there is a top ten list here:

Marketing driving NZ up obesity table - 03 Dec 2005 - NZ Herald: Health, Health Services and Medical news


I was referring to populations, the Japanese are overall not obese, or did you think they are all sumo wrestlers? Presumably you wear lederhosen and play in an oompah band then….;);)


Sun Wukong said:
And due to this, even if the "fat-behinded" Americans and Europeans changed their diet from one day to another, this wouldn't change a lot in terms of "the" rainforest; they or others, like the Chinese, would just use the area for another purpose,
Click to expand...

This is the kind of nihilistic game the USA plays when it refuses to sign pledges to clean up the planet. Haven’t you heard of “doing your bit”? Oh well, let’s do nothing, we are clearly all doomed….

Let me just say that I enjoy your erudition, and you clearly enjoy displaying your knowledge. Perhaps you regard the forum as a kind of lek….

I look forward to your reply, as I just know you have to have the last word :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top